The Michael Knowles Show - Ep. 1056 - Epstein Didn't Fund Himself

Episode Date: July 28, 2022

Saudi Arabia figures out how to cram nine million people into a giant wall, the State Department was apparently Jeffrey Epstein’s landlord in Manhattan, and Portland residents break down over the filth and crime. Become a DailyWire+ member today to access Matt Walsh’s documentary “What Is A Woman”, movies, shows, and more: https://utm.io/ueMfc  — Today’s Sponsors: $10 OFF orders over $50, OR $20 OFF orders over $100 thompsoncigar.com/KNOWLES20 Promo Code 'KNOWLES20’  Stop funding woke corporate agendas. Switch to PureTalk instead. Save 50% OFF your 1st month when you enter promo code KNOWLESPODCAST at puretalk.com  PragerU Kids offers what’s no longer being taught or celebrated in schools – American values and history. Visit PragerUKids.com today! Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

The internet is ablaze with what most conservatives are calling a hellish techno dystopia. This, care of, the kingdom of Saudi Arabia, which has proposed building a 1,6-mile-long city for 9 million people built into a mirrored wall. For too long, humanity has existed within dysfunctional and polluted cities that ignore nature. Now, a revolution in civilization is taking place. Imagine a traditional city and consolidating its footprint, designing to protect and enhance nature. The line will be home to 9 million residents and will be built with a footprint of just 34 square kilometers. And we are designing it to provide a healthier, more sustainable quality of life.

The line's communities are organized in three dimensions. residents have access to all their daily needs within five-minute walk neighborhoods, and the line's infrastructure makes it possible to travel end-to-end in 20 minutes with no need for cars, resulting in zero-carbon emissions. The line is 500 meters tall, 200 meters wide, 170 kilometers long, and housed within an elegant mirror-glass facade, the line, the city that delivers new wonders for the world. I love it. I totally love it. It is the answer to so many of our problems.

Conservatives hate this stuff because it's extremely ugly and inhuman. But libs love it. Libs are the ones who are attracted to all this weird of futuristic stuff, which means that Saudi Arabia has figured out a way to cram all the libs into a giant self-sustaining wall that they basically never leave and convince them that it's really cool and progressive and good for the environment. Here is the entire pitch. You say, hey, Libs, great news. Yeah, yeah, we figured out how to save the planet. Uh-huh. Yeah, we solved climate change. Yep, it's great. We just need you to climb inside this giant wall prison. Uh-huh. Just get on in there. Yep. And then that's it. Great job.

We did it. And then they just stay there. And then we get our normal society back. And by the way, lest you forget, it's a wall. It's a wall. If the Saudis give us the technology and we can build this thing along our southern border right along the Rio Grande, then Muhammad bin Salman deserves a Nobel prize. I am all in. And this is the Michael Noel show. Welcome back to the show, my favorite. comment yesterday is from Charles Davis, who says, I got to watch Fauci unmasked a few days ago. Excellent series, Michael. Thank you so much. What a great comment. Really important comment now, because the Republicans are finally threatening to investigate Dr. Fauci if they retake the Congress. Fauci is running away. There is pretty much a Fauci-shaped hole in the NIH. He is so eager to

run away from those investigations. Make sure you arm yourself with the facts by watching Fauci unmasked over at Daily Wire Plus. Then once you know everything, you can talk to your friends about it. When I want to talk to my friends, you know what? I love Pure Talk. Right now, go to PureTalk.com, enter promo code at Knowles Podcast. You're getting pinched right now. Everything that you buy is getting more expensive. With one exception, your cell phone plan. If you switch to Pure Talk, what are you spending on your cell phone bill? Probably 60, 70, I don't know, 80 or 90 bucks a month. You can cut that by two-thirds if you switch to Pure Talk right now. Pure Talk gives you talk, text, plenty of data for just $30 per month. No price increase there. No Biden inflation affecting that. I am a

Pure Talk customer. I love Pure Talk. It's incredibly reliable. I use Pure Talk a lot for my job. I use Pure Talk for my personal life. The 5G coverage is great. Plus, they make the switch from your current provider, incredibly easy. Won't take you more than 10 minutes, which is amazing. Well worth the savings. Ten minutes, definitely well worth saving $60 bucks a month. Right now, our listeners, by the way, in addition to that, are saving 50% off their first month when they use promo code Noles podcast at PureTalk.com. Hard to depend on the government, hard to depend on this crazy economy. You can depend on Pure Talk. Pure Talk.com. Select a plan, enter promo code Noles podcast. Save 50% off your first month. Switch over in less than

10 minutes. PureTalk.com, promo code, K-N-O-W-L-E-S-P-P-O-D-C-A-S-T, all one word. Speaking of difficult neighborhoods to live in, how's that for a transition? Portland residents, Portland residents, one of the most liberal cities in a very liberal state in America, they are finally realizing how terrible it is to live under those disastrous policies in those terrible neighborhoods, and the Portland residents are speaking out. I'm living in a nightmare neighborhood. It's really scary. For years, these neighbors have been watching the city's homeless crisis spread across parts of southeast Portland. Now it's right outside their front door. I want to cry. I just want my house back. Christina Hartnett lives on 80th

in Powell, where a majority of the campers stay. My lawn is now becoming a public bathroom. She fears leaving her house just to go to work. And it is scary when you have grown men meth raging in your driveway. The last thing I feel safe doing is going out and saying, hey, can I, can you please move so I can go to work? Calling the police and city is an everyday chore with little reward. So far, no one has come to help us. I feel like nobody hears us. Nobody cares about us.

This mother didn't want to be identified on camera, afraid of retaliation from those living on the streets. She rarely lets her children outside to play. It's very sad because they're just kids so they want to play. That is very sad. This is really sad. We have so many of our public political debates at this level of ideology, at the level of, well, this is my utopian vision for the future. This is my utopian vision. This is how society would work if I were the king.

No, this is how it would work if I were the king. You see kind of these utopian visions coming out of Saudi Arabia right now. That's where our political debates tend to live. But where the political debates really should live, and for the vast majority of people who don't have their faces buried in the political headlines all the time, where it really does live, is on, hey, do I have a good neighborhood for my kids? Hey, can I go outside and not be afraid for my life? Hey, can I just kind of have a nice day-to-day existence without having to worry about crazy meth heads or criminals coming and attacking my kids or stealing my stuff or defecating on my lawn. That's the first kind of political problem you've got to solve before we get to all of our wonderful

pie in the sky dreams. And it's not just Republicans who think that way and it's not just Democrats who think that way. At the elected level, frankly, no one, no one thinks in those basic terms about things that actually matter to people. This is why Trump was such a breath of fresh air in 2016. I remember vividly when he was on the campaign trail and he was asked, what are you, you're going to do if you're president. He said, I want to give people good neighborhoods in a good place to live. And everyone, forget about the left, even everyone on the right attacked him for it because they all got their kind of egghead, libertarian, ideologue glasses and bow ties on. And they said, well, actually, that's not the role of the federal government to provide good neighborhoods for people.

And actually, no, but the only thing you can do is cut the marginal tax rate on the blah, blah, blah, blah, blah. And I think the vast majority of people heard Trump say that and said, oh, yeah, that sounds good. I want a good neighborhood. I want a good community. I want a good. I want a good good way of life, okay? And I want my president, with whatever power he's got, to try to improve life at a very basic level for people, okay, at the level of how do we live day by day? Those people in that video, living in Portland, those are not rock-ribbed right-wing Republicans. I imagine that inasmuch as those people have any political affiliations, they're all Democrats. I just, just statistically, that's what we're looking at in Portland.

and they know that these policies are terrible. It's not just Portland. The New York mayor, Eric Adams, has been whining for two weeks now about how Texas is busing illegal aliens up to New York. Illegal aliens, illegal immigration, the policy that Eric Adams supports a total Dem policy, now New Yorkers are seeing the consequence of that. They realize it's terrible.

And on crime, too. And on homelessness, too. the New Yorkers, most of whom are Democrats, are realizing that those policies are terrible. Muriel Bowser down in D.C., the superlib dem mayor of D.C. is complaining that red state governors are shipping illegal aliens to D.C. Super lib policy, they're just seeing the consequences of it right now. It's the Democrats realizing that. That's what Joe Biden is worried about. That's what the White House is worried about. They're not worried about angry Republicans or even Republicans being fired up and energized for the midterms. What they're really terrified of is that they're losing the moderates and they're losing

the centrists and they're losing a ton of Democrats because eventually reality reasserts itself and you're seeing the consequences of defund the police and you're seeing the consequences of let the criminals off the hook and you're seeing the consequences of decriminalize all the drugs and you're seeing the consequences of destroy the economy, and you're seeing the consequences of flood the country with illegal aliens. It takes a little while, but eventually you see the reality of that, and even the Dems don't like it. Because even if they might be titillated by the pie in the sky ideology, eventually, when someone is defecating on your lawn, there is pretty much no one who is so committed to his or her ideology that he will continue to support that. when you actually see the meth head tweaking on your front step. That's just not going to work.

So the only thing they can do is lie and try to redefine all the terms. We are now in a recession. We are officially in a recession. The second quarter of GDP numbers have come out. We've got two consecutive quarters of negative GDP growth. The White House has asked about this. This is just before the numbers come out. They're asked about their attempt to redefine recession. And what do they do? they redefine redefining. If things are going so great though, then why is it the White House officials

are trying to redefine recession? No, we're not redefining recession. If we all understand a recession to be two consecutive quarters of negative GDP growth in a row and then you have White House officials come up here to say, no, no, no, that's not what a recession is. It's something else. How is that not

redefining recession? Because that's not the definition. That is not the definition. Brian Peace said in 2000, of course economists have a technical definition which is of a recession which is two consecutive quarters of negative growth i can tell you this say he said two consecutive two negative quarters of GDP growth is not the technical definition of recession it is not it is not i can speak to i can speak to you to what he said yesterday in front of all of you which is the last thing that you just repeated there are many factors

There are many factors, economic factors and indicators to consider. And I will say that the textbook definition of recession is not, is not two negative quarters of GDP. I will not, I will not speak to la, la, la, la, la, la, la, la, la, I will not acknowledge what the National Economic Council Chairman said in 2008. I will not, I will ignore that. I will only speak to what he said yesterday because Oceania, as at war with East Asia. Oceania has always been at war with East Asia. That's their story, and they're sticking to it. Peter Ducey brings the receipts to the White House. Peter Ducey, the reporter in the White House press pool, he shows up to the briefing room, and he says, we're in a recession, right? Or we're about to be

officially in a recession. And Corrine Jean-Pierre says, no, we're not in a recession. He goes, why are you redefining recession? She goes, we're not redefining recession. Recession is not two consecutive quarters of negative GDP growth. And the person she cites is Brian Dees, who's the director of the White House National Economic Council. Brian Dees has been going on TV, going to the White House saying that the actual technical definition of a recession is not two consecutive quarters of negative GDP growth, which was news to all of us, because if you ever took an economics class, if you ever opened up a dictionary, if you opened up a dictionary today, you will find that the technical definition of a recession is two consecutive quarters

of negative GDP growth. But then I had, I was second-guessing. I was second-guessing. I was being successfully gaslit by the White House because I thought, huh, I don't know, I'm not an economist. Maybe I'm just wrong about this. And then Peter Ducey says, wait a second. In 2008, this same man, this very same director of the National Economic Council, Brian Dees, said verbatim the technical definition. Economists have a technical definition of recession, which is two consecutive quarters of negative GDP growth. Oh, okay, I guess we're just being gaslit then, right? And because Ducey brought the receipts, Corrine Jean-Pierre had nothing to say. And she, her actual answer is, I'm not going to talk about that.

I'm not going to acknowledge what he said. I'm not going to acknowledge the dictionary. I'm not going to acknowledge the economics textbooks. The definition of a recession is whatever I want it to be, or whatever Joe Biden says it is. But that is not the case. Words do have meaning there is a reality to the economy. me, and we are now officially in a recession. Biden can keep lying about it all he wants, just like the libs can say that a man is actually a woman, or the libs can say that a baby is not a baby, and the libs are going to try to say that a recession is not a recession, but it is. We are officially in a recession, and Joe Biden's lies are not going to make it any easier on your wallet. Speaking of sketchy finances, I got to give a shout out to Tyler Cardin over at

The Blaze. My friend Tyler came across a pretty interesting discovery. Last night is when I saw it on Twitter. This comes from the New York Daily News. December 23rd, 1997, article by Greg B. Smith. It's referencing some pretty nice Manhattan real estate talking about how the State Department owned some real estate, a nice building on East 69th Street. Big old mansion that was the official Iranian residence, and then someone took it over, and then the State Department was renting it out to people. Listen to who the State Department was renting it out, too. Quote, the State Department began renting the building to Jeffrey Epstein, a Palm Beach, Florida

financial advisor in 1992 for $15,000 per month. By January 1996, Epstein had moved out. He eventually decided to rent to. Fisher, a lawyer who represented blah, blah, blah, blah, blah. Fisher began paying Epstein a tidy $5,000 a month profit for Epstein that the government didn't know about. Fisher moved his family into the upper floors and his law firm onto the lower floors. But the State Department then found out about this. They insisted Epstein had not gotten permission to sublet, and besides, it was furious about the profit that he was pocketing. And so the feds made Epstein

kick this guy out. Why didn't we know about this? Why did, we've been talking about Jeffrey Epstein for years now. And for a while, the mainstream media didn't want to pick it up. And for a while, the government didn't want to talk about him. There was always some sketchy stuff about him. Why are we only finding out right now in the year of Our Lord 2022, years after Jeffrey Epstein killed himself, long after the trial of Ghislane Maxwell, his madam was taking place, long after all this, all these dodgy crimes were taking place, long after Alex Acosta, the U.S. attorney was apparently told that Jeffrey Epstein belongs to intelligence, and then that story went away. Now we find out that Jeffrey Epstein's landlord in his infamous New York City Mance,

the landlord was the U.S. State Department? Huh? What? Can we get an answer on that? Can we get an answer from anybody? I don't have any, I don't have any, I don't have any. I don't have any point to make here, just raising the question, thought that was a little bit curious. Seems to me, a lot of people have suggested, maybe Jeffrey Epstein wasn't just acting on his own. Maybe Jeffrey Epstein wasn't just this eccentric gazillionaire with some weird sexual perversions. Maybe Jeffrey Epstein had the backing of state actors. And whenever anyone brings up that question, all of a sudden the story goes away. Maybe Jeffrey Epstein didn't kill himself. Maybe there's a lot more to this story that implicates a lot more people. Maybe after years of these investigations and everyone doing their due diligence and oh good, Gilae Maxwell is going to prison,

even though she's now being moved to a much lower security facility in Florida, that's kind of interesting. How come we still don't have the black book? How come we still don't know a damn thing about Jeffrey Epstein and his operations and the people he entrapped and the got it in writing right here, got it in print, the state actors that he was regularly working with. So it's just more evidence what we've all known for a long time, which is that there is a degree of corruption in the permanent bureaucracy that a lot of us did not know existed. I'm not just talking about all those politicians are corrupt. Yes, politicians are very often corrupt. Yes, political systems tend to be corrupt. But I'm talking about not the elected people exactly.

I'm talking about the permanent bureaucracy, the state department, the executive agencies, the intelligence community, and the media that totally carries water for them, that has been operating without virtually any oversight for a very, very long time, implicated in some very serious crimes. And we're not getting any real news reports. How come the head of the blaze just poking through some random threads on the internet stumbled across this? Why didn't the Washington Post cover this?

Why didn't the New York Times? But the New York Daily News, that's where this was reported in the first place. How come we didn't hear about this for many of the big establishment corporate media organizations? What are they covering up? This is the kind of issue that gives us Trump 2024. Okay, this is the kind of issue that gave us Trump 2016 and Trump 2020, and that is going to be very powerful for Trump in 2024, because the thing that Trump has, and I think to a large degree still has that no other candidate did have is that he is totally

from outside this world. Whatever you want to say about Trump and his vices and his bad habits, the guy is not a career politician. He's not the usual kind of politician that you see from either party. And whatever you want to say about Trump, the permanent bureaucracy, the deep state, the intelligence community, whatever, hates this guy's guts. and acted, I think, quite clearly, illegally to undermine his campaign, to spy on him and to undermine his presidency, which when you look at the degree of corruption from the permanent bureaucracy, makes any reasonable person like Trump more. And so he's out campaigning. Trump is very much on the campaign trail again, even though he is not announced a presidential run. He's out there. He's speaking most recently in Washington, D.C., about the issues that are going to affect 2024.

The society that refuses to protect its children is a society that soon will not be able to protect anybody. This is a hallmark of cultural and social decay against which we should fight back very hard and very soon. We don't have time to wait years to do this. The sickos who are pushing sexual content in kindergartens were providing puberty blockers, to young children who have no idea what a puberty blocker is. Neither do I, by the way. Neither do most of the people in the audience as you smile. Let's just say they're not good,

are not just engaged in acts of depravity. In many cases, they are breaking the law, and they should be held fully accountable. Now, this is something that Trump does that other politicians don't do. Every politician reads from the teleprompter, that. And Trump is reading from the teleprompter there. And he doesn't quite have that 2016 energy. It's early in the cycle. He's a little bit older. It's not, he's not at a rally or something like that. So it's a little bit. And he's just reading from the prompter about the puberty blockers and

a lot of people don't know what they are. And he says, yeah, I don't really know what they are either. Isn't this stuff weird? And he gives you this sense that he is actually a spectator in the political process. That he's kind of with you. He's on the same side of the stage that you are. He goes, what the hell are these people doing? I don't know. But it's bad. We know it's bad, right? We all know that it's bad. So that's going to be his pitch. If this is the campaign, it's good that he's talking about these social issues, the issues like transing the kids have proven very effective for Republicans recently. But it's not, it's not that 2016 energy. Everybody's talking about transing the kids. Trump need, if Trump is going to really come out like a wrecking ball like he did in 2016,

he's going to need something that distinguishes him from the other guys. Because everyone's going to be talking about transing the kids. In 2016, it was we're going to build a big, beautiful wall, we're going to completely shut down illegal immigration. All these illegals are rapists and murderers. And nobody was talking like that on the Republican stage. I don't care how against illegal immigration you were. You weren't talking like Trump. Trump needs something to distinguish him again because even the outsider angle is going to be less persuasive

after the man was president for four years. I still think there's a good argument to be made, but it's not going to be as strong. So as we approach the midterms, as we get after the midterms, as we see to approach the moment where Donald Trump might be announcing that he's running, whoever is advising him is going to need to hone that campaign message to give people a reason to vote for him over, say, a Ron DeSantis, who right now is way behind in the polls, but it's also because his name recognition is much, much lower compared to Trump. Ron DeSantis obviously wants to challenge President Trump in 2024.

And DeSantis has some real advantages here. He's got some, Trump has some real advantages. He's super famous. He's hilarious. He's a celebrity. He was already the president. He's got a lot of support. He's got a lot of advantages.

DeSantis has some advantages too, though. DeSantis is young. He's new. And novelty can be very helpful in politics. And he is full of energy. He is also saying all the right things. We are taking. a stand and these bills I'm signing into law today, foreign adversaries will not have access

to our schools, government, and companies like they have in the past. In fact, the first bill that I signed today safeguards our public institutions from undue foreign influence, and that means prohibiting agreements between public entities and the Communist Party of China or Cuba or any of these other malignant forces. As of the time we signed this bill and it goes into effect, Florida, we will be banning things like Confucius institutions from being in our universities or in our colleges. And I know we had issues with that right here in Miami-Dade counties. We're also going to sign the Combating Corporate Espionage in Florida Act.

It creates new criminal offenses in Florida for the theft and trafficking of trade secrets. This is really good stuff. The policy is really good. We do need to kick out this foreign influence, especially Chinese influence. something that DeSantis is honing in on, which is something that Trump really honed in on, which is something that scandalized virtually every other Republican in 2016 and almost all the Republicans at the national level is they realize that we need to wield state power. We don't need to become tyrannical. We don't need to become dictators. We don't need to wield

state power capriciously or arbitrarily. But conservatives, when we get power, We need to use it justly. We need to use the power that the people give us to do good things and improve people's lives. For a long time, for decades in the conservative movement, Republican politicians have repeated libertarian slogans to avoid doing their jobs. I said, well, you know, if we, gosh, if we regulate Google, we'll be just like the leftists. Oh, we can't do. They would be very wrong to wield the state to stop drag queen perverts for from jiggling for little kids. Oh, no, that would make us no different from the leftists if we ever used any government

power at all. No, no, the founding fathers hated the idea of law and order and justice. No, what are you talking about? That's just completely made up. It's a political joke. It's a farce that was pushed by, largely by big corporations that just wanted less regulation. And it was pushed by libertarians who, as a percentage of the electorate, a very, very small percentage and who have an outsized influence or have had an outsized

influence in the conservative movement, but don't actually represent a large portion of the American voting base. And it represents an idea that actually does not have a lot of grounding in American history. And it represents an idea that politically is just completely impractical. Power is going to flow to the people who are willing to use it and the institutions that are willing to use it. That's a basic law of politics. And so if the Republicans get elected and say, elect me, I'm not going to do anything. Then you're just seating the entire culture to the left. And then I have to ask, well, why am I even voting for you?

Why would I vote? I vote for the Republican. He does nothing. I vote for the Democrat. He does something. But I vote for the Republican and the Democrats going to do something anyway. So what's the difference? There's no reason.

And what DeSantis and what Trump and some other people, too, you're seeing a little bit in the Senate from Senator Cruz, from Josh Haley a little bit. You're seeing this movement among conservatives now to say, wait, no, we can keep boys out of the girls room. We can ban drag queen story hour. We can shut down certain Chinese goods. I know maybe it'll hurt GDP a little bit, but this is a national security threat now. We can keep Chinese communist influence out of our schools. We can say no. We can wield the power justly. The founding fathers were very well aware of that. Every sane person in our country was aware of that until very, very recently. This is a related story on this. Some big porn website just went down. a porn operator just pled guilty to sex trafficking, to a sex trafficking conspiracy in a San Diego

federal court. I'm not going to say the name of the porn company, but their modus operandi was that they would lure these girls in, these girls who wanted money, who were 18 years old, 19 years old, and they would say, hey, come do this porn shoot, and don't worry, it's not going to end up on the internet. It's going to be for a private DVD collection overseas. It's never going to be an American. We'll give you some money. And they'd bring the girls in, and they'd give them booze and they'd give them drugs and they'd pressure them and they'd coerce them in some cases. And then the girls would do it. In one case, the girl was underage. It was a girl that was, I think, 17. And then what happens? The videos end up online, ruins the girl's lives,

ruins the girl's reputations. And they've had all these problems since then. And this porn company just went down. The guy who owns the porn company is a fugitive from justice right now. He's on the run. They haven't caught him yet. This is great stuff. The website's not great stuff. But using state power to shut this down is great stuff. It's really important to do this. One, it's important for the girls. You might say, what, what? These girls, these girls are so stupid. They didn't realize it was going to end up on the internet. Yeah, I'm not saying these girls acted in the wisest manner. I'm not saying, no, but we should protect, we should protect naive, reckless 18-year-old girls from ruining their lives because of these predators who lie to them and deceive them and drug

them and have sex with them on camera and make a buck doing it. It's just wrong. There's no right to pornography. Pornography is not good for you. Okay. It's not something that we, well, you know, George Washington and John Adams, Patrick Henry said, give me high-speed internet porn or give me death, right? Is that what he said? I don't think so. No, this stuff was considered illegal. Universally, it was considered ugly and something that should be suppressed until about 10 or 20 years ago. And here's why, by the way, here's the reason that even if you like porn, if you're listening to this show, you probably don't think porn is the greatest thing in the world. But even if you say, well, people should have a right, people should have the license at least to look at porn sometimes.

Here's why porn is a bad thing. And here's why young men write into my show constantly about how much they hate porn and how it's ruining their lives because they're addicted to it. Ask yourself, why is it bad for a kid to grow up in a bad neighborhood? You know, we all agree it's bad. When kids grow up in a bad neighborhood, it's bad for them. We'll say, oh, man, those kids in the inner city, man, they never had a chance. There's gangs around. There's drugs. There's education's terrible. They grew up in a bad neighbor. It's not even their fault, but it's going to put them on a bad path. They're much more likely to have a bad outcome if they grow up in a bad neighborhood. Why is that? Because our environment matters, our society matters. It affects us.

even things that the kids are not doing, just being around that stuff in your society does affect you. And it can make your life worse. That's just called politics. That's just called living together. It's when you live in a culture mired in crime and vice and sin, when you're living in a place like Portland and you've got just this stuff all around you. You're not the one taking the meth. You're not the one defecating in public, but it's just all around you. it affects your life and it makes things worse. And it tempts you to do the drugs and it tempts you to get involved in the crimes and it tempts you to get involved in all sorts of bad stuff. And we have a political right to say, no, get off my lawn. A classic conservative slogan, get off my lawn. Get off my lawn now. We have a right to say, no, you don't get to take advantage of the girls. You don't get to deceive the

naive 18-year-old girls. No, you don't get to do the drugs. No, you don't get to, you don't get to, do this stuff. Okay, we want good neighborhoods, a nice place to live. You want people to conserve stuff, you got to give people a nice, lovable place to live. We have the right to a nice life, to a flourishing place. We have a right to, not just to liberty properly understood, which is not the same thing as license. We have a right to the blessings of liberty. The liberty used as an instrument to virtue and to a flourishing society. That's what the founding fathers thought. That's what sane people thought. And that's what the dirtbags

who were trying to degrade our culture want us all to forget. Don't forget it. You know, we just hit another historic milestone in our company's history. No, I'm not talking about us closing in on one million Daily Wire plus subscribers or selling over 70,000 Jeremy's razors

or even me hitting one million subscribers on YouTube. Thanks to you. I am referring to Nat's movie, what is a woman, finally getting like, one critic review. So, you know, the critics, the people loved it. I mean, the movie had almost 100% popularity audience review, but the critics didn't want to touch it on Rotten Tomatoes. So then we got, I think the number is five critics watched the movie, and they loved it. So it's now

got the movie has a 100% critics review on Rotten Tomatoes. This is really the Libs stepping on a This is really the Libbs undermining themselves because when the liberal critics boycotted the movie, it just left it open for moderate to conservative critics, all of whom love the movie because it's a great movie. So go see what the critics are raving about with 100% approval. Go to DailyWire Plus, become a member, stream what is a woman, get 35% off your membership when you sign up today. Dailywireplus.com. We'll be right back with a lot more. We've now arrived at my favorite time of the week when I to hear from you in the voice mailbag. Voice mailbag is brought to you by Pure Talk out of Pure Talk.com, select a plan, enter promo code, Noel's podcast, save 50% off your first month.

All right, let's get to the first question. Hey, Michael, this is Camille. I'm just calling in, so I have a question about guys and girls' mentality with dating. So as a girl, I have a very intense moral hangover, probably derived from a lot of Catholic guilt, but it kind of prevented me from engaging in my quote-unquote hoot years. But I was wondering if guys have that same type of guilt, if they're in their player years, not just guilt for what they're doing to girls, if they're not dating them,

if they're just hooking up with them, but if they have any guilt of just kind of living that more immoral lifestyle of hookup culture. Would love to hear your thoughts. Thanks, and love the show. Love those phrases that I realized I did hear correctly when you said the men have the player years, and then I think the first phrase you used was ho years for women. So first thing, generally, if you haven't already gone through it,

probably good to avoid those years. I know it's very easy. I think a lot of people fall into it, obviously, but, you know, if you can avoid, I wouldn't, I wouldn't aim at having hoe years or player years. Probably not that great. Your question, though, do you, do men feel some shame and guilt from that? The answer is yes. Yeah. Not just, because, because you roll over on the pillow and you look at the girl lying next to you and you say, oh, why am I? Yucks. Why am I doing this? Not just because of the girl, but because of you, because you are degrading yourself. Because you are, when you pursue women or men in that way as just a vessel for your own pleasure, you are degrading yourself to the level of an animal.

You are a human being with intellect, with reason, with virtue, with integrity, with worth. But you degrade yourself to the level of an animal that just needs to be titillated when you do that kind of thing. And it reduces your view of the other person, too. You're degrading the other person. And even if you have a crush on the other person, even if you think very highly of the other person, when you engage in an act together that is intrinsically shameful, that will lower your view of the other person as well. And it will diminish the possibilities for a longer kind of love affair with that person. So yeah, men have it too. Men and women have it a little bit differently because men and women approach sex differently. But men have it too, and men can get sex-austed,

and men can feel that same kind of shame. And ideally, that would be sooner rather than later if they have to go through that at all. Next question. Howdy, Nostradamus? My name is Houston, and my question is about a topic that has come up when discussing religion among my peers. I've grown closer to the church while in college, both thanks to you and my study group. Here's the thing. I listen to a lot of metal, but not just any type, specifically death metal. I understand that some of the lyrics are blasphemous, but I'm far more captivated by the intricacies of the instruments, which makes sense since I play guitar myself, both for a band and a church. Is it possible to be practicing Christian while also enjoying and performing this type of music?

If not, couldn't the same be said for the modern degeneracy that kids are listening to now? I've been told that as long as I don't feel conviction, I'm okay, would love to hear your thoughts on this. Thanks. A Sworthy Breakfast Taco. Really, really good question. And I'm going to give you a really, really hard answer. Yeah, you probably shouldn't listen to that. I'm sorry, I don't want to be a wet blanket. It's not even just the lyrics. I mean, obviously, you shouldn't listen to music that is blasphemous. But you can find metal, you can find extremely hardcore metal that is not overtly blasphemous. That's not even the main issue. The main issue with death metal is the music,

actually. It's more the percussion. Plato has this point, which is, he observes that more than anything else, it's music and rhythm, even especially, that can transform your soul in that it bypasses your reason. When you're listening to music, especially music that's very percussive, especially music that's very bebop-y, you know, or in the case of death metal, you know, it's all just like gung-gog-gag-gag-gag-g-g-g-g-g. When you listen to that, you're not reasoning about it. You're not sitting back like you're listening to, I don't know, a symphony by Bach and thinking about it and thinking in a really calm way about it.

And even then, you know, even more classical music will bypass your reason to a large degree. But when you're listening to very percussive stuff, it will totally bypass your reason and it will transform your soul. It will take the strongest hold upon your soul, as Plato says. And so you've got to be aware of that. I'm not saying you can never listen to death metal again. But I wouldn't recommend it. I wouldn't recommend it.

I would recommend generally avoiding things that take you totally out of your reason. And when you're in a mosh pit, you're listening to death metal or something like that, you are out of your reason. When you drink three bottles of whiskey, you're going to be out of your reason, too. And you don't want to do that. Sorry to be a wet blanket. I'm not saying you have to totally tune out all the death metal immediately. But I think as you grow in your spiritual life, you will naturally pull away from that kind of music and pursue other kinds of tastes. Sorry to say, I'm sorry to rain on your parade, but that's just the way it is. I'm sorry that I have to play do. pill you, but that's the way it goes. Next question. Hello, Michael. This is Tony Fauci. I wanted to call in that you know that I am deeply disappointed in the disinformation that you've been spreading on your show.

And I wanted to tell you to tell all of your sheep to wear the mask. Your sheep need to wear the mask. My question is this, do you really think Elon Musk is going to buy Twitter? If so, I might just have to retire early. Thanks. And remember to wear the donut, Michael. Just wear the donut. You're not the Tony Fauci. I'm the Tony Fauci. No, you're the Tony Fauci. Which one do I, which one do I go for? I don't. I know. That was an excellent. It was a really excellent Dr. Fauci impression. Or you just are Tony Fauci. To your question, is Elon Musk going to buy Twitter? Right now, it looks like he is not. I actually did have a friend of mine who from the very beginning of the Elon Twitter saga said, Elon doesn't really want to buy Twitter. He's.

he just wants an excuse to sell Tesla stock at all-time highs. It's the same thing as when Elizabeth Warren complained that he didn't pay enough taxes, and Elon did a Twitter poll where he said he was going to sell a bunch of Tesla, and then he would have to pay taxes on it. My friend viewed that as another kind of ruse just to be able to sell Tesla at very high prices. So it could be that. It also, the other option is this could be a way for Elon Musk to try to get a better deal on Twitter. But I don't know, if I were a gambling man today, I would say Elon does not buy Twitter, and it was all just a really funny troll, which is fine by me. I really enjoyed the troll. I got a real kick out of it. And if Elon got to make a little bit of money on it, all the better.

Though it may backfire. He may end up having to spend a lot of money to get out of the Twitter deal. All of that remains to be seen. But either way, we all got a bunch of lolls out of it. So I think it was worthwhile. Next, voicemail back question. Mr. Nostradamus, I am Smiling Sam. I am a blue checkmart athlete. I've been in the UFC for a number of years. And I'm one of those guys that thinks LeBron and people like that should shut up and dribble. So I've kind of held myself to that same principle. I will shut up and punch. Now my question for you is, should I keep doing that? I have a topic that I won't. I will not hold my tongue on abortion. I am a foster parent. I have six children. I have adopted one.

And I'm going to continue adopting children until they are all mine. And they are of all very love. Other than that though, I tend to keep my mouth shut because like I said earlier, I'm a big fan of the shut up and dribble thing. They aren't. Should I be fighting fire with fire? Should I be using all the power that comes with my little blue check mark to try and fight back, to try and reassure others that I'm with them? Or should I not? I appreciate it. Also, I live in Nashville.

I would love to have you and your family out for barbecue one of these days. Anyways, keep up the good work, my friend, and thank you for the advice. That sounds great. Thank you for the invitation. Would love to do it. And thank you for the question. Very good question. Should you use the great power and responsibility of the blue check and voice your opinions? Perhaps, to some degree. My advice here is it's not an all or nothing kind of thing. You don't need to either keep your mouth totally shut or have the mag a hat on doing jumping jacks constantly. You're very lucky that you're in the UFC, which is probably the most conservative sports league that there is in the country right now. So you'll get a little grace for that anyway. But as you say,

I won't keep my mouth shut on abortion. You could be judicious and prudent about the ways that you speak up. You're not a politician. You're not, you don't hold a public office. So you don't have to speak up on lots of these different issues. You certainly can. But perhaps you pick your battles. Perhaps you do it in a way that's a little subtler. You know, you do it through. You do it retweets. You do it through posting, hey, I listen to this, I really liked this. You do this through weighing in in a way that maybe has a little bit of a lighter touch. You're very known for a tougher touch in UFC. So maybe you try a little bit of a lighter touch in politics. I think that can be really charming and effective if you're a little bit winsome and witty about

these things. So I would maybe lean into that. It doesn't have to be an all or nothing. owning the lives is much more an art than a science. Great question. All, let's get to at least one regular mailbag before we go from Jackson. Hey, Michael. First off, just want to say, love to show and have listened to you for years. Thank you very much. Recently, the topic of sexual morality and ethics has come up a lot with particular emphasis on the perils of periscuous and hedonistic sex outside the confines of a monogamous union. Yes, we are living in the age of monkey pox. Keeps cropping up. A key recurring point raised is that the kinds of sexual, activities that typically occur in these environments are deviant in nature, driven by a falling of society's morality and commitment to prioritize healthy monogamous relationships. My question to you is this, if a man and a woman are in a monogamous and committed marriage to one another, is it okay for them to engage in sexual acts that may be considered kinky? Or would that still be considered succumbing to the same temptations that drive so many to make immoral decisions about their sexual behaviors. Curious about your perspective, thanks again for the fantastic show. Really good question.

The question is, USAA knows dynamic duos can save the day, like superheroes and sidekicks or auto and home insurance. With USAA, you can bundle your auto and home and save up to 10%. Tap the banner to learn more and get a quote at USAA.com slash bundle. Restrictions apply. You've got some kind of pervy desires. Is it okay to act on them? No. Basically. is the short answer. No, it's not. Because they are, by definition, perverted. They're distorted. They're disordered. They're corrupted. And you don't want to be those things. You don't want to be corrupted. You want to be properly ordered. Think about what is the most popular, kinky behavior in our pop culture? It's 50 Shades of Gray, right? It's BDSM. What does BDSM stand for? It stands for bondage,

dominance, sadism, and masochism. Those are all bad things. Those are all wrong separately. And torturing yourself, torturing other people, dominating someone, tyrannizing someone and enslaving someone. Those are all bad things. You wouldn't want to do that. You certainly wouldn't want to do that to your wife. Now, you might say, well, I'm not really doing it. It's not real. It's just pretend. But you are really doing it. That's the thing. It's not even just a fantasy in your mind. You are really acting it out in real time on a real human being. And you can even both pretend that you're not really doing it, but you are. And where this is sort of dangerous for you is that your desires influence your behaviors, right? You're saying, I have this sexual perverted desire and I therefore

want to behave in a way that expresses that. But your behaviors also affect your desires. This is what an acquired taste is. When you're a little kid, you don't like beer. You know, you take a sip of your daddy's beer. You don't like it. When you get older, you have some more beer, and then you start to like it, and you acquire that taste, and then you start to desire beer. Your behavior, anyone who's ever engaged, well, with drugs, it's very clear, or really just any kind of habit, you know that the more you do it, the more you can acquire a desire for it. And so the more you indulge these kinds of desires, the more powerful the desire will become. And the desire, in fact, could even change and become more intense and more hardcore. It happens

with drugs. It happens with sex and porn. It happens with sloth. It happens with all kinds vices. And so you don't want to do that. A good image of this actually comes from Dante, where Dante has this erotic love for his lover, Beatrice. Not a lover, they don't act on anything, but she's just the woman in his mind. And the beauty of Beatrice is erotic for him. It arouses erotic feelings. And he doesn't just repress it. I'm not saying just repress everything. He points it in the right direction. So his erotic love for Beatrice leads him up to have to see God. He sees God literally reflected in her eyes.

He's looking at his lover's eyes, and those eyes are reflecting the love of God. Now, had Dante not been ordering his erotic love in the right way, in the right direction, if instead he had been dreaming about or fantasizing about, you know, taking Beatrice to 50 shades of gray and whipping her with chains and things like that,

then he probably would not be pursuing that all the way up to heaven. He'd probably be going in the other direction where the whips and chains are used really all of the time. This is a real wet blanket kind of a mailbag in a way, because I'm saying, don't listen to death metal, or it's not good for you. Don't do weird stuff with your wife. But it is a fact, okay? And as our pal says, facts, don't care about your feelings, all right?

That's the way it goes. Wise people have known this throughout all of history. And it's not just giving something up. It's not just giving up the death metal. It's not just giving up the weird whips and chain stuff that you want to do. with your wife, it's giving you a much better alternative. It's pointing you at something which is higher, which is music that can be higher that can be just as, or more so instrumentally intricate and complicated and beautiful, much more even than the popular music you're listening to, and an understanding of love

and even erotic desire that is much higher than whatever kind of behavior, which you already admit is perverted, might be in your mind at the moment. We're falling creatures, so we're going to fall short, but you actually can, you can order yourself in a way. You can improve. You can grow in virtue. Your desires can become ordered in a more correct way. And you can more and more approach the love that moves the sun and the other stars. Tune in tonight, by the way, to catch an all-new episode of Daily Wire backstage where your favorite Daily Wire hosts come together to discuss the news of the day. You'll join me, Ben, Matt, Drew, and the guide king, Jeremy Boring at 7 p.m. Eastern on the DailyWire's YouTube channel or at DailyWireplus.com. It's going to be a lot of fun.

Until then, I'm Michael Knowles. This is the Michael Nulls show. See you next time. If you enjoyed this episode, don't forget to subscribe. And if you want to help spread the word, please give us a five-star review and tell your friends to subscribe. We're available on Apple Podcasts, Spotify, and wherever else you listen to podcasts. Also, be sure to check out the other Daily Wire podcasts, including the Ben Shapiro show, the Andrew Claven Show, and the Matt Wall Show. The Michael Noles Show is produced by Ben Davies, executive producer Jeremy Boring, supervising producer Mathis Glover, production manager, Pavel Vidovsky, editor and associate producer,

Danny D'emico, Associate producer Justine Turley, audio mixer Mike Coramina, and hair and makeup by Cherokee Heart. Michael Null Show is a Daily Wire production, copyright DailyWire 2020. Hey there, this is John Bickley, DailyWire editor-in-chief and co-host of Morning Wire. On today's episode, new evidence suggests a landmark Alzheimer's study may have been fraudulent. A Senate report details how China has attempted to infiltrate the Fed, and House Democrats move to impose term limits on the Supreme Court. Join us and get the facts first on the news you need to know with our show Morningwire.